Mixed Noble‐Gas Compounds of Krypton(II) and Xenon(VI); [F<sub>5</sub>Xe(FKrF)AsF<sub>6</sub>] and [F<sub>5</sub>Xe(FKrF)<sub>2</sub>AsF<sub>6</sub>]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The coordination chemistry of KrF 2 has been limited in contrast with that of XeF 2 , which exhibits a far richer coordination chemistry with main‐group and transition‐metal cations. In the present work, reactions of [XeF 5 ][AsF 6 ] with KrF 2 in anhydrous HF solvent afforded [F 5 Xe(FKrF)AsF 6 ] and [F 5 Xe(FKrF) 2 AsF 6 ], the first mixed krypton/xenon compounds. X‐ray crystal structures and Raman spectra show the KrF 2 ligands and [AsF 6 ] − anions are F‐coordinated to the xenon atoms of the [XeF 5 ] + cations. Quantum‐chemical calculations are consistent with essentially noncovalent ligand−xenon bonds that may be described in terms of σ‐hole bonding. These complexes significantly extend the XeF 2 –KrF 2 analogy and the limited chemistry of krypton by introducing a new class of coordination compound in which KrF 2 functions as a ligand that coordinates to xenon(VI). The HF solvates, [F 5 Xe(FH)AsF 6 ] and [F 5 Xe(FH)SbF 6 ], are also characterized in this study and they provide rare examples of HF coordinated to xenon(VI).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".